Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jun 5.
Published in final edited form as: Genet Med. 2015 May 21;18(2):189–198. doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.60

Table 2. Gene Prioritization by Mutation Burden Analysis.

Mutation burden analysis was conducted for 112 genes with biological relevance to AVSD. The top 6 ranked genes are shown.

GENE CASES
n = 81
CONTROLS
n = 4300*
Odds Ratio 95% Confidence Interval Fisher’s Exact
p-value
(two-tailed)
Fisher’s Exact p-value with nucleotide-by- nucleotide coverage correction+
With Mutation Without Mutation With Mutation Without Mutation
NIPBL Rare
Rare Damaging
6
3
75
78
102
27
4198
4273
3.3
6.1
1.1 – 7.8
1.2 – 20.4
0.02
0.008
0.01
0.02
CHD7 Rare
Rare Damaging
9
3
72
78
215
58
3940
4097
2.3
2.7
1.0 – 4.7
0.5 – 8.6
0.04
0.02
0.07
0.3
CEP152 Rare
Rare Damaging
8
4
73
77
178
70
3925
4033
2.4
3.0
1.0 – 5.1
0.7 – 8.3
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.05
BMPR1a Rare
Rare Damaging
3
3
78
78
31
27
4269
4273
5.3
6.1
1.0 – 17.5
1.2 – 20.4
0.02
0.008
0.02
0.02
ZFPM2 Rare
Rare Damaging
11
8
70
73
282
189
3872
3965
2.2
2.3
1.0 – 4.2
0.9 – 4.9
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.05
MDM4 Rare
Rare Damaging
6
6
75
75
68
53
4232
4247
5.0
6.4
1.7 – 11.9
2.2 – 15.2
3.2 x 10-4
1.8 x 10-5
0.002
6.8 x 10-4
*

The EVS does not provide sample level information, therefore for consistency the burden analysis assumes that each genotype serves as an independent sample. The total number of patients for the EVS cohort per gene was the median of the total number at each position with a rare variant in that gene.

+

Refer to Table 3 for variant level data